Talk:Mewing (orthotropics)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education assignment: English Composition 1102[edit]

This article is currently the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 January 2024 and 17 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): DiceyDomino (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Beefamus.

— Assignment last updated by Beefamus (talk) 16:52, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 26 April 2024[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was against redirecting. Zenomonoz (talk) 03:21, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mewing (orthotropics)Mewing (orthodontics) – Judging by our redirect from orthotropics, it seems that the current qualifier is a sub-class of orthodontics associated with (and potentially coined/created by) John Mew. I'm therefore proposing to change the parenthetical disambiguation from orthotropics to orthodontics so as to use a more generic class of disambiguator (per point 3 under WP:NCDAB), a likely more commonly known term, and a potentially more neutral qualifier than one strongly associated with one of this technique's creators. All the best, ‍—‍a smart kitten[meow] 10:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC) Note: I no longer support this page move and am now neutral; see my comments below. [verify] 13:26, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Pinging Di (they-them), in case you want to take part in this discussion, as you previously moved the page to this title. All the best, ‍—‍a smart kitten[meow] 11:12, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Personally I would not move it, since orthodontics is a real medical science whereas orthrotropics is a pseudoscience. Mewing isn't backed up by science, so it doesn't feel right to associate it with actual medicine IMO. Di (they-them) (talk) 16:26, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That's a fair point - I hadn't thought of that. I won't remove the RM tag/close this right now in case any other editors have an opinion, but I'm a fair bit less in favour of moving the page than I was earlier. Thanks for bringing that up :) ‍—‍a smart kitten[meow] 17:31, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per WP:RECOGNIZABILITY. RS do seem to describe orthotropics as being within the realm of orthodontics. I don't think using the (orthodontics) disambiguator necessarily implies that it is a legitimate or widely-accepted practice within the field. Colin M (talk) 18:06, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Colin M: When disambiguation in the title is needed, we do tend to label unscientific topics as illegitimate: Detoxification (alternative medicine), Bodywork (alternative medicine), Geobiology (pseudoscience) to name a few. ~~lol1VNIO (I made a mistake? talk to me) 08:26, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (original proposer) Switching to neutral. I think Di raises a good point above. However, I also think the orthotropics disambiguator is a bit problematic WP:RECOGNIZABILITY-wise (which was one of my reasons for originally proposing this move), as noted by Colin M. I'm finding myself wondering if there's an alternative parenthetical qualifier that can be used which is more recognizable, but doesn't have issues around potential implications of legitimacy. All the best, ‍—‍a smart kitten[meow] 13:26, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • oppose per Di, though i'd support a a dab of 'pseudoscience' or 'quackery'—blindlynx 19:28, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – Mewing is not a "subclass of orthodontics". It is the common name for the orthotropic system of beliefs (the Mews just use appliances to force tongue posture in clinical cases). Per NY Times: "In 2018, after years in obscurity, orthotropics (rebranded by incels as “mewing”) leapt into the mainstream, the subject of discussion on alternative-health forums and beauty". I'd support leaving it as is, or redirecting to 'Mewing' on its own. Zenomonoz (talk) 23:10, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. This isn't recognised as genuine orthodontics and we should not do anything to imply that it is. It only exists within the Mews' own (at best) fringe field of "orthotropics". --DanielRigal (talk) 23:28, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Not really orthodontics specifically. Arconning (talk) 13:02, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.